About your Search

Search Results 0 to 25 of about 26 (some duplicates have been removed)
at some point. the loss of credibility for ten years, it is unacceptable in the u.n. cannot define what you mean by unacceptable. those will be what will have to be applied. >> let me ask you two other questions, one narrow and won broad. >> fight that battle over whether we can negotiate or not. because we come to the point of what to do about the program and we need to demonstrate a level to find a diplomatic solution. >> negotiation -- [talking over each other] >> we cannot afford open-ended negotiation. >> the negotiation of some kind is necessary. >> whichever option you favor. this >> let me go northwest to syria. syria was discussed in the presidential campaign but the more it was discussed there and less difference there seemed to be between the two candidate. it came down to should we be arming the opposition? let me ask that question in a broader context? should we are mccumber opposition and whenever answer to that question is what is the strategic approach to the syrian conflict that preserves or protect american interests at this stage? >> let me begin and that end. the ame
of this stuff. it's out in the open. it's up on the websites of u.n., european union, the american bar association, the deans of most law schools in american universities, leading american foundations. it's all there on the internet. people are not talking about world government anybody, but world governance, a form of transnational governance. look at four people, quick views, and talbot, the president of the brookings institution, a major think tank in washington. the former secretary of state, and as a journalist for time magazine in the 1990s, they wrote an article in which he welcomed super national political authority. he said, quote, "i'll bet within the next hundred years nationhood as we know it will be obsolete and all states will recognize a single global authority." he concluded saying "the devra davis luges of power upwards of units of administration is basically a positive phenomena." coe, currently, today, the chief legal adviser of the u.s. state department, in other words, he advises the president on what the law is, was gave a major speech last week at georgetown law,
's right out in the open. up on the web sites of u.n., european union, the american bar association, the deans of most law schools at american universities, leading american foundations, it's all there on the internet. and people are not talking about world government anymore, they're talking about global gore nance -- governance, this form of transnational governance. so let's look at four people, quick views of theirs, who have given ideas about this. strobe talbot is currently the president of the brookings institution, he's former secretary of state and as a journalist for time magazine in the 1990s, talbot wrote an article in which he welcomed supernational political authority. he said, quote: i'll bet that within the next hundred years nationhood as we know it will be obsolete, and all state will recognize a single global authority. he concluded by saying that this devolution of power upwards toward the supernational and downwards toward autonomous units of administration is basically a positive phenomena. harold coe is currently -- today he's the chief legal adviser of the u.
the tweets. that's at c-span.org/fiscalcliff. ! new a few moments we'll hear about the u.n. vote of making palestine a nonmember observer state. from a state department spokesman and from british foreign secretary william hag in about ten minutes. and after that, we'll reair the hearing on amtrak's operations. several live events to telling you about tomorrow. from london they release the report on british media practices that including phone-hacking of people in the news. .. is $50,000. almost four to with the rest costs. and the vast majority of producers who use public schools. we could take the money we spend today, every public school system and save billions of dollars per year at the same or better outcomes. >> deputy secretary of state, bill burns' special envoy met with houston and president ,-com,-com ma mahmoud abbas in new york city to discuss thursday's vote in the united nations to elevate palestine to be a non-observers say. from today's state department briefing, this 10 minute. >> let's start with your incredibly successful efforts to lobby others not to vote in favor of t
not take this to the un in the short term and we urged them not to do that. if they do so we will have to consider the right way to vote. in an end point is this. we will not solve this problem that the united nations. this problem will be solved by israelis and palestinians sitting at the negotiating table. there may be dangers from pushing the too early in terms of a cutoff of funds for the palestinian authority and other consequences that could follow so in the end bets get negotiations going rather than discussions at the u.n.. >> if the prime minister wants to send a clear message to scotland and england belong together shouldn't he be doing his best to make sure the principal road from london is not going to come back? >> my friend makes a very attractive bid for the statement and the chancellor is not here but i'm sure other treasury colleagues have been listening closely. >> the prime minister claims universal credit will bring about the most fundamental and radical changes. given the government's propensity for this can he guarantee that the universal credit will be interested
in the hands of the green lobby. >> well, the u.n. has been very encouraging of the green lobby and the screen job issue is not an issue here in the united state. it is an issue also in europe being encouraged by the u.n., encouraged by the meeting over the summer. but europe is also finding green job aren't all they thought they would be. spain has stopped subsidies for solar power under that doesn't work in sunny spain it's not going to work anywhere. germany has also stopped at subsidies which is more understandable because there's a lot of clubs in germany, even though the economy isn't cloudy at all. the u.n. has had a strong influence on this. >> yes, sir. >> chuck bradford. you are probably not old enough to remember, the jimmy carter gave lots of money, billions of dollars to alternate energy projects. >> i do remember. >> too many of those plants still exist is the question? i don't think they lasted more than a couple years. secondly, are you familiar with another jimmy carter program, where he gave money to five different steel mills, for about engraft immediately on the fifth one p
an issue in the united states. it is an issue also in europe, being encouraged by the un and the meetings in rio over the summer but europe is also finding that green jobs are not all they thought they would be. spain just opted subsidies for solar power and if solar power doesn't work in sunny spain it won't work anywhere. germany has also stopped it subsidies for solar power which is more understandable because there are a lot of clouds in germany. even though the economy isn't cloudy at all. the un has had a strong influence on this. >> chuck bradford. you are cannot hold enough to remember but jimmy carter gave lots of money, billions of dollars to alternate energy projects. >> i do remember. i had to waiting gas lines in the 1970s. >> to any of those plants still exist? i don't think they lasted more than a couple years. secondly are you familiar with another jimmy carter program when he gave money to build five different steel mills four of which went bankrupt almost immediately and the fifth one put out of business the plant in kansas city they blame on things? >> jimmy carter's pr
important element, the u.n. dimension: respect for the territorial integrity and independence of iraq. so that meant that the action team could not go to nondeclared facilities. only delareed facilities could be -- declared facilities could be inspected. but then the security council formed out that right to, i would say, break the integrity to the -- [inaudible] so they were charged with nondeclared facilities and activities. of course, then it was, obviously, chemical, biological. but the beauty of these wars that it's tough sanctions system was in place. we have to have that also. but immediately when the inspection started, the sanction system was gradually released. so this was a functioning system, good behavior led also to these single sanctions. bad behavior, which happened, of course, quite frequently, some blockages and refusals, was met by some tough language from the security council. not from the israeli government or anyone, it was security council under the charter of the united nations that put that pressure. so, of course, we know that this system works extremely well. it
understandable. there are more clouds. the un has had a strong influence. >> you're probably not old enough to remember but jimmy carter gave billions of dollars to alternate energy products. >> i was waiting in the gas lines. >> to those plans still exist but settled think there lasted. are you familiar with another jimmy carter program he gave money to build five steel mills for went bankrupt almost immediately and the fifth one point* of business from of plant in kansas city. >> to make carter's programs did not work then. i remember reading one or two hours to fill up with gasoline in the dc area. these programs are not working now and are unlikely to work in the future. the government cannot at pick the winning project. and never would have thought to pick the apple iphone 5 people wait in line because the one to buy one. [laughter] not necessarily technology that it is an expensive but what they're willing to spend money. we don't know what it it is. i am sure there are many entrepreneurs who have a better idea than those in washington. >> would you be in favor of a significantly hig
their leader and needed help to do it and went to the u.n. to get that help. >> there were large numbers of iraqis that would have liked him overthrown -- >> there's a much more sectarian situation. >> sure it was. >> and libya was not a sectarian situation. so if you had a situation where you had support with the vast majority of the people, and you had u.n. backing so there was no way it could be tarred as a u.s.-alone, imperialistic attack to try to scoop up natural resources for yourself and cause blowback, then, yes -- >> i have seen this movie before, and hearing this talk about, oh, yeah, we're not going to bring in the exiles, and we're going to pick legitimate people in the country, and tom friedman backs it up. please. i saw it the first time. you guys were all in school the first time, but even there you probably got the idea that it didn't work out so hot. let's just let things happen the way they're going to -- let other people worry about their own countries. we have enough problems in this country. >> jim, did you have -- [applause] >> yeah. no, that's fairly similar to my
at the u.n. and e had this graphic -- he had this graphic illustration of the problem, he was, he created what was a new threshold for them. he called it a red line, but a new threshold. they had -- for the previous, i don't know, 6-12 months the israelis had been focusing on, primarily because of the defense minister, ehud barak, the zone of immunity. and what he meant was iran was going to with the character of its nuclear program, the depth, the breadth, the redundancy, the hardening of the nuclear program was going to reach a point where the israelis would actually lose their military option. and no israeli prime minister is going to accept a situation where they face an existential threat, but they no longer have a military option to deal with it. so ehud barak was trying to identify the point at which the zone of immunity was going to kick in. now, he was saying it was going to be the end of 2012. now, he's changed that and said it's been pushed back 8-12 -- 8-10 months. when the prime minister was in new york he focused not on the zone of immunity, he focused on what's the point in
and even suicideion, during the winter months. mont.un goes away on the firstci of october, and it might come out by the first of theby theirt following july. the last of the thing was, gran was in a drinking culture. army officers in those days were expected to drink like gentlemen, which meant that they were expected to drink a lot an ant's vo the effects. grant's boys would start toe slur. so would start to wobble when he had to drink. he was a sorryrr excuse for an officer in the sculpture. he resigned rather than be brought up on charges of dereliction for his drinking. reputation thation that grant acquired in the army. the army between the war withar mexico and the civil war was axd very small and very gossipy club. okay, so grant drinking stoutcla out of the army. no one thought anything of it began,when the civil war grant vaulted over dozens of officers, senior to himself. those who took the light in spreading the stories of grant's drinking. of i tracked down an account ofi tk grant's drinking to the extent that i could. exten then it discovered that on maybe two occasions dur
in the u.n., when you look at their position on iran, when you look at their position on other issues, they as often as not tide against the west rather than with the west, and that is a simpler by moving to a world in which there will be great diversity. as to how countries fashioned their own versions of maternity and allowing themselves to politically. -- align themselves geopolitically. let me begin to him by offering some thoughts on what we do about this. moving to a world in which we are globalized and interdependent, but in which there's no single, single captain at the helm, is a world that provides great opportunities but also great risk. we have never lived in a world in which decisions made in beijing immediately impact decisions made in brussels which immediate impact decisions here which immediately impact decisions in brasilia. we need to figure out how to manage that world, how to provide global governance in a world that is not only multipolar in the sense of multiple poles of power, but also quite ideologically diverse. and i will and simply with offering free though
declaration of human rights after world war ii. thanks in part to eleanor roosevelt who helped draft the un's declaration after her husband's death. today, more than 70 countries recognize a right to health or health care in their constitutions. virtually every industrialized nation has taken a step to influence these rights by establishing some type of universal health coverage for their citizens. with one major exception. >> you can watch this and other programs online at booktv.org. >> tell us what you think about our programming this weekend. you can tweet us at booktv, comment on her facebook wall or send us an e-mail. booktv, nonfiction books every weekend on c-span2.
. when i look at what's going on this area, to u.n. security council is dysfunctional, not working, not capable of coming to a conclusion. the g20 has not fulfilled, at least not according to me, the expectations we had when this larger body was created. in other words, from a european point of view, you need to worry about the fact that europe will have obviously a smaller portion of the cake in the future. germany is going to a 1% of the worlds population. the e.u. altogether 5%, 40 or so. in other words, what probably needs minority protection. we have a ton about that much. that's a specific problem for europeans, not so much for americans. if that is correct analysis, did we need to worry about global governance. we are capable as long as we are in charge and as long as we still represent to some degree the majority and as long as are capable for helping to shape the international system. we are capable of shaping an international system, which will be sustained even when we are only a minority. in other words, we called the shot. can we reform the u.n., the g20 system and oth
hill today, u.s. ambassador to the u.n. commences and rice met with republican senators to discuss attacks on u.s. consulate in benghazi, libya. after the meeting, senator john mccain, lindsey graham and ayotte spoke with reporters. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible] >> they are significantly troubled -- [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] libya as well as other americans . [inaudible] >> i'm more disturbed now than it was before -- [inaudible] [inaudible] -- an al qaeda storm in the making. i'm very disappointed in our intelligence community. i think they failed in many ways. with a little bit of inquiry and curiosity, i think it would be pretty clear that to explain this episode is related to the video they created a mob that turned into a riot was far filled. at the end of the day we're going to get to the bottom of this, we have to have a system we can trust. and if you don't know what happened, just so you don't know what happened. people can push you to give explanations and you can say i don't want to give that information. here's what i can tell you. the american people
'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador who had nothing to do with benghazi, and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received, and besmirch her reputation is outrageous. and, you know, we are after an election now. i think it is important for us to find out exactly what happened in benghazi, and i'm happy to cooperate in any ways that congress wants. we have provided every bit of information that we have and we will continue to provide information, and we've got a full blown investigation. and all the information will be be scorched to congress. i don't think there's any debate in this country that when you're four americans killed, that's a problem. we've got to get to the bottom of it. there needs to be accountability. we've got to bring those who carried it out to justice. they won't be any debate from me on that. when they go after the u.n. ambassador, apparently because they think she is an easy target, then they've got a problem with me. and should i choose, if i think that she would be the best person
unparalleled success. at the u.n. lasher president obama spoke strongly about this thing that the u.s. will support a free and open internet so individuals have information to make up their own money. no one has been more forceful advocate of the economic and social opportunities of the open internet and secretary of state hillary clinton. who delivered a landmark speech of internet freedom in 2010 when she said one of the fundamental freedoms of the internet age was the freedom to connect. the idea that governments should not prevent people from connecting to the internet to websites, or to each other. now, internet freedom is sometimes cited as an obstacle to addressing the issues of cybersecurity and intellectual property theft. i disagree with the. i disagree not because i question the importance of the issues of the magnitude of the threat your very serious problems that we have to address. but i believe based on my experience that we can address those issues without undermining the core values like internet freedom and privacy. we've put our money where our mouths are at the f
department to one carry this in the u.n. silica to the international forum, particularly if it continues to escalate, to frame the declaratory policy for the nation's absorbers, but may not be participating so that it's clear and search link of other diplomatic actions that could potentially be taken to cut off the escalation of the activities. in other words, attacks on us for a larger group him et cetera. >> i don't want to take off the table action beyond diplomatic action because they think would've exhausted many potential diplomatic actions and summoning to think what are please to send a strong signal to the leadership in x land and other places including covert actions. >> quick question. so for the u.s. government has said nothing publicly about who they will lose behind the attacks. her speculation and media based on leaks and credible sources, but the u.s. government so far has said nothing publicly. what is your decision assessment as to whether or not he should publicly identify x land behind the attacks and should you give some sort of public proof to why you believe that?
is in control of its own sovereignty, the current u.n. security counsel revolution, the current isaf operation ends. you'll need a new, sound legal basis for the new operation. we will need status of forces agreements, and the north atlantic coup sill -- council is just engaging with the afghan government on what the shape of that condition would be. there's a plan for the end of 2014, and then there's the beginnings of the negotiations about what the next mission will be. as i said, it's not a combat mission. this is part of the long term commitment at the international community, way out over what is the transformation decade that agreed that the -- there's the military building, what the international community and a broader sense, what they are doing for the substantial problems of property development, govern nans in achings, and then what individual countries, like our own, are doing in the bilateral program to be part of the whole approach in afghanistan, of course, led by the afghan government. >> right. just want to ask questions about it at some point or another and how steaning and
's fixed system on the bottom. it's un-- unmanned underwater vehicles that could be antonymous. we are not far from being able to deploy the system. we'll don't develop in field and integrated unmanned aerial system to froarpt a carrier. this next year, here in this fiscal year 13, we'll do a demonstration of unmanned vehicle from a carrier and recover that will be able to use that system. that will read us to building a system that can operate within our air wings and provide that persistence, maybe support logistics. if we don't have all the system of support the pilot. that's extra weight. extra payload, extra systems, extra capability. and that will be an important part of our future. a few words about our rebalance to the asia-pacific. sustaining appropriate capability in the middle east. it's been a long time focus for the u.s. navy. five of our seven treaty allies are in the pacific. six of the top economies in the largest army in the world are in the asia-pacific. so it makes sense that we would do that. as i have shown you or mentioned on thegraphic there, 50 -- about half
are only a minority? in other words, when others call the shots. can we reform the u.n., the g20 system, and other international institutions including the world bank, an antiquated voting system, except her in a way that the rising powers, when they asked for a greater share of the cake, they find that acceptable, legitimate, and fair. i think that is a huge task that we should commit ourselves to, but with a sense of confidence. so far i think there is no reason for us to believe that we have run out of steam. >> i feel like them back in the u.s. election with my hedge fund buddies talking about the travails of the 1%. let's broaden the discussion, bring in some of are more diverse voices. anybody want to enter the conversation, just raise your hand. alcoa new. we have people with mike sue want to colony. the state your name and affiliation and ask a question record comment. >> thank you. i would like the fast you the following question. you have mentioned a number of, let's say, tools with such as several weapons, such as drones and special forces. there just tools. to achieve what?
and that will be at a time when the afghan government is in full control of its own sovereignty. the current u.n. security council resolution basis for the current operation will come to an end. you'll need a newly legal basis for the new operation. who would enforce agreements for the 1940s and the north atlantic council is just engaging with the afghan government on what the shape of that mission would be. so there's a mixture of conditions based in the implementation and then there is the beginning of the negotiation about what the next mission will be. but as i said, it will not be a combat mission. the wellbutrin advisory mission, which is part of the long-term commitment of the international community to afghanistan way out over the transformation decade of the tokyo summit this summer. so there's going be amick shared in a fact, military capability building. but the international community and a much broader sense is doing for the very substantial problems of quality develop and comment governments in afghanistan and the individual countries like our own are doing in bilateral programs, which is pa
by the populationst un is against us? >> that is the answer i have just given you.r tha the rules of engagement are different but i cannot make specific judgment with your written a vice but it is the sole reason it is a complex tapestry of a number of reasons. >> if i might their recent statistics. and the north atlantic council always takes an interest.on the latest report suggested % of civil 80% of casualties are caused by the insurgents to be at issued did to the outer forces. >> don't misunderstand. my question relates 20,063rd 2007. >> those in civilian casualties there is still blamed for the level oftime violence sometimes precarious. >> as soon as there is any indit indication but local a visit maybebility and casualty. so that maybe the environment attributed. >> with a final remark protecting the civilian population we have that protection that would not be t viable the. >> general, deciding the eules of engagement with the north atlantic council and does direct that the rules of engagd does direct that the rules of engagement and there itti and i possibility of as civilian casualty
institutions like the un and world bank that they were all designed to be weak, they were all designed to play a secondary role to nations whose sovereignty we saw as inviolable. i don't think that is sustainable because so many of the interests you or i have as individual citizens of wherever we come from are really affected by decisions that happen on a global stage. >> host: david rothkopf is our guest. numbers are on the screen if you'd like to participate in this author:2 your 2-585-3885. in east and central time zones 585-3886. if you live in the mountain and pacific time zones, mr. rothkopf, former managing director of kissinger associates and current ceo of foreign policy. what is foreign policy? >> guest: divisional, washington post foreign policy magazine, the foreign policy website which is not much bigger than the magazine, three million visitors on the web site and runs a series of events and other programs on international issues. >> host: mr. rothkopf, in "power, inc." you have a chapter about a swedish boat. what is that story? >> guest: i wanted to go to the origin story of th
Search Results 0 to 25 of about 26 (some duplicates have been removed)